7e Lesson Plan in Science

European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111

ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.571250 Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017
HOW IS THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN PHYSICS LESSON

WITH USING 7E MODEL TEACHING ACTIVITIES
Umit Turgut1
Alp Colak2
Riza Salar3i
1Ataturk University, Kazim Karabekir Education Faculty, Erzurum,Turkey
2Ministry of Education, Istanbul, Turkey
3Ataturk University, Kazim Karabekir Education Faculty, Erzurum,Turkey
Abstract:
The aim of this research is to reveal the results in the planning, implementation and
evaluation of the process for learning environments to be designed in compliance with
7E learning cycle model in physics lesson. "Action research", which is a qualitative
research pattern, is employed in this research in accordance with the aim of the
research. The research was implemented at a public high school in Turkey. The research
continued for twelve weeks. Two-hour class periods were included on a weekly basis.
Study group of the implementation consists of 52 students attending to two different
classrooms. The ages of students vary between 15 and 16. Triangulation method was
employed in collection and evaluation of data in order to increase research reliability.
Observation, interview and peer assessment were used in this study for process
description. It is revealed from the observations that the majority of students perceived
the lessons as more pleasing by virtue of the discussions in physics lesson.
Keywords: 7E model, physics education, action research
1. Introduction
Learning is related to a structural shift in cognition. It is related to automatic

readjustment of critical moments. These changes are complex and non-linear.
Furthermore, cognitive changes are result of interaction and self-learning systems.
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.

© 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group 1
Umit Turgut, Alp Colak, Riza Salar
HOW IS THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN PHYSICS LESSON WITH USING
7E MODEL TEACHING ACTIVITIES
Learning occurs when conceptual structures are reinterpreted in the mind of learner as
a result of internalization (assimilation) and adjustment of new information. It is not
possible to internalize or assimilate information in a simple manner. Information is
interpreted and organized with new acquisitions based on cognitive structures
previously developed, and a new meaning is formulated on these (Fosnot, 2013). If
students sense that the information in physics is not abstract and, contrarily it is directly
associated with their life, then they learn science by feeling it owing to their increased
interest in and attitude towards it. Such association may even facilitate their learning
(Cepni, Ayas, Johnson and Turgut, 1997).
Inquiry and research-based teaching methods (discovery, exploration and
inquiry research methods), which have been developed by taking the steps followed in
scientific research process into account and conceptual change-based teaching methods
(conceptual change texts, analogies, 5E and 7E) are rather prominent as compared to
other teaching methods. More predominant employment of these methods than the
others can achieve a better learning of physics lesson acquisitions and more organized
conceptual structures and skills of students. (Acıslı 2010; Gurbuz 2012; Hırca 2008;
Kanli 2007; Savas 2009 and Ozsevgec 2006).
Findings resulting from studies which employ 7E learning cycle model based on
structural learning theory indicate that this learning model increases academic success
level of students, improves their attitude towards science and allows for permanent
conceptual development (Avcioglu, 2008; Cepni, San, Gokdere and Kucuk, 2001;
Gurbuz, 2012; Kanli, 2007). Furthermore, conducted studies emphasize the effect of
worksheets on the increased success in concept teaching (Budak, 2000; Kurt, 2002).
Considering all of these, the question to which an answer is sought in the research
comes to our minds: "What are the results in the planning, implementation and evaluation of
the process for learning environments to be designed in compliance with 7E learning cycle model
in physics lesson?"
1.1. Theoretical Framework

"7E Model" has been included in the literature when Eisenkraft (2003) expanded on
BSCS 5E model, which is a widely preferred and recognized instructional models of
today, by introducing two new phases on the first and final phases. The first phase in
5E model, which is the engage phase, has been preceded by an elicit phase in which
students elicit prior information, and the final phase in the same model, which is the
evaluate phase, has been followed by an extend phase while the phases in between
remained the same.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 2

Sahin (2014) intended for the determining to which extent the structural
approach is included in the learning and teaching activities regarding Science lessons in
the academic curricula of Faculties of Education based on opinions of students.
Findings of research reveal that activities related to structural approach are included
and used in teaching.
Carkıt (2013) addressed the evaluation of grammar teaching process from the
perspective of structural approach at secondary schools. Practices of teachers during the
course of process were comparatively examined based on genders and service
durations of teachers. The majority of interviewed teachers mentioned that they engage
students in study book activities after lecturing grammar subjects and having students
take notes, and they stated that traditional lecture method and question-answer method
were the most predominantly used methods while teaching grammar.
Yerdelen (2013) carried out his study with the purpose of researching the effect
of 7E learning cycle, which has been improved in epistemological and metacognitive
terms, on the success in physics lesson and epistemological understanding of high
school students. As a result of the study, a significant difference to the favor of
experimental group was observed in the mean epistemological understanding scores of
students in experimental and control groups. Furthermore, it has been also determined
that the traditional method is more effective in increasing the success levels of children,
who demonstrate very low epistemological understanding, in physics, whereas 7E
learning cycle which has been improved in metacognitive terms proves more useful to
other students.
Gurbuz (2012) studied the effect of materials, which were developed in
accordance with 7E learning model in science lesson at secondary school, on academic
success of students and permanency. As a result of the research, it was observed that
the materials prepared in accordance with 7E learning model increased their academic
success and achieved conceptual permanency.
2. Methodology
Data obtained from the same environment by means of different measurement tools are
recommended to be comparatively analyzed in order to detect the unique qualities of
learning environment in a valid and reliable manner (Keser, 2003). In this context, it was
deemed necessary to develop and employ multiple research techniques in addition to
instruments thereof which are supported by interviews with students and direct
observation of relevant environments so that an impartial critical view of the learning
environment process can be achieved with a full and in-depth control. Therefore,

multiple measurement tools are used in this research so as to ensure that teaching
process is evaluated in the best possible manner.
"Action research", which is a qualitative research pattern, is employed in this
research in accordance with the purpose of the research. According to Mills (2003),
action research is a process of systematic inquiry that seeks to identify the manner in
which teaching by will be delivered teachers, researchers, administrators, school
counselors or other participants in teaching-learning environment and how students
can achieve better learning. This method combines research and practice, thus
facilitating the implementation of research results. Teachers conduct the activity itself or
play an important role in action research. Teachers examine a problem or an action,
which is identified through observation of teaching process, in a systematic and
sequential way. Therefore, action research is also called "teacher research" (McNiff,
Lomax and Whitehead, 2004).
In action research, data collection process takes place in a systematic way as well.
Both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods can be employed (McMillan
and Schumacher, 2010). Data collection methods in action research may vary depending
on research questions, status of research and individual qualifications of researcher. In
this scope, data may be collected with the help of methods that are based on experience,
inquiry and examination. In experience-based methods, participatory observation, field
notes, meeting minutes, observation etc. may be used as data collection tools based on
active or passive participation of researcher in data collection process. Inquiry-based
methods include structured, unstructured and semi-structured interviews, standard
tests, questionnaires, attitude scales, control lists, self-assessment forms and similar data
collection tools. In scope of examination-based methods, audio and video records,
diaries, internet logs, e-mails, student products, maps, plans, archive records etc. may
be used as data collection tools. By virtue of these, researcher finds the opportunity to
use a suitable research method or integrating new research methods into the process in
circumstances where researcher is incapable of providing adequate answers to research
questions. Therefore, data which support each other are collected at different times and
locations in an attempt to achieve data triangulation in action research (Kuzu, 2009).
2.1 Research design and study group

The research was implemented at a public high school in Turkey. The main criterion in
the selection of this school is the fact that one of the researchers has been delivering
service as a physics teacher for six years at the school. Besides, the physics laboratory at
which the study was carried out had the necessary materials available. The support

given by school administration to such academic researches has also played a major role
in the selection of the school.
The research continued for twelve weeks. Two-hour class periods were included
on a weekly basis. Magnetism unit was delivered at two different classrooms of 11th
grade students. The prominent concepts in the subjects under electromagnetism unit of
11th grade physics curriculum are as follows:
 Magnetic pole;
 Magnetic field;
 Magnetic properties of substances;
 Magnetic permeability;
 Magnetic force;
 Magnetic flux;
 Magnetic induction, Faraday's and Lenz's Law.
In scope of this research, worksheets were prepared based on 7E model reported
by Keser (2003) in the lesson teaching process according to the structural approach. The
literature on particularly magnetism related to science teaching in accordance with
structural learning theory was reviewed, and worksheets were prepared based on the
evaluation of the results. Seven worksheets were prepared based on the number and
quality of objectives and acquisitions and intensity of concept, all of which are specific
to the scope of the subject. Worksheets were designed in the form of two sheets by
using colorful and easily comprehensible images in two columns in horizontal order in
order to allow for activities and sequence among phases to be easily understood.
Furthermore, sentences were kept briefly with underlined or italic writing of important
concepts. Study group of the implementation consists of 52 students attending to two
different classrooms at a public high school in 2013-2014 academic year. The ages of
students vary between 15 and 16. The study was carried out by dividing students in
groups of five. Two groups, however, consisted of six students each. During the course
of implementation, researcher-teacher toured among the groups and provided students
with guidance, ensured that they discussed about the activity and questions.
2.2. Data Collection Tools

"Data source triangulation" method was employed in collection and evaluation of data
in order to increase research reliability. Observation, interview and peer assessment
were used in this study for process description.

2.2.1 Individual interview

Researchers conducted semi-structured evaluations in order to identify the process-
related situations that were not observed and to collect data based on student opinions.
Semi-structured interview is a data collection method based on qualitative research
approach used to obtain same type of information from different individuals, in which
researcher can obtain in-depth information on research subject, act with the flexibility of
asking additional questions while adhering to previously developed interview form
(McMillan and Schumacher, 2010). Semi-structured interview was opted in this research
in order to determine parallelism or difference between the interviewees in respect to
delivered information, to make comparisons accordingly while providing data for
discovery.
"Process-related semi-structured interview form" (PRSSIF) was prepared for
students to obtain data on to which extent structuralism-based elements have been
actually implemented, the problems encountered during the course of program
implementation, and recommendations. Prior to preparation of semi-structured
interview form, the studies and documents in the literature were reviewed. This form
has been designed in three sections and supported with probes in accordance with
specialized academicians to seek answers to sub-problems (Appendix 1). The
information on researchers and a brief introduction of the objective and reason of
research are given in the first section of the form; the questions regarding evaluation of
process by student in scope of the research objective are included in the second section
while the questions with seek to reveal to which extent the worksheets are fit for
purpose are in the third section.
6 out of 52 students in the study group were randomly chosen and individual
interviews were conducted in the research. Interviews were made immediately
following the completion of relevant teaching activity and were recorded in audio and
video. Each interview lasted for approximately 40 minutes. After interviews, the
records were transcribed into writing without any alteration in the meaning of opinions
and thoughts and evaluated.
2.2.2 Observation
Observation can be expressed as one or multiple individual(s) observing and recording
the occurrences in real life within framework of a plan (Raizen & Rossi, 1998). If
individual(s) does not give verbal information on the research subject or have difficulty
in explaining a situation, researchers develop and collect data based on what they see,
hear and record by means of observation (McMillan and Schumacher, 2010). In this
respect, weekly teaching activities were videotaped. Video records allowed for one of

the researchers who is also a teacher to observe the activities thereafter, making an
objective approach to classroom practices possible. Furthermore, it was also attempted
to contribute to evaluation of different occurrences during the course of teaching
process by different individuals and to enable them to express their opinions on the
process in a concrete manner while increasing reliability by means of interaction within
the classroom, and performance of teachers and students.
"Integrating Learning Environment Questionnaire" developed by Keser (2003)
and "Structural Environment Observation Form for Chemistry Lesson" developed by
Yasar and Sozbilir (2012) were reviewed and a new observation form was developed in
accordance with the objective and structure of research in this study. A pilot study was
carried out to determine any unforeseen circumstances excluded from expected
occurrences by recording the learning environment to the extent possible. Following the
practice, deficiencies about observation form were remedied and after certain
readjustments, the observation form was finalized considering expert opinions.
Observation form includes blank sections in which observers may record their
thoughts on the respective frequencies of behaviors expected from teacher and students
as well as on activities themselves in the activities carried out in accordance with 7E
model in the available learning environment. One observation form for implementation
of each worksheet was used in the research.
2.2.3. Peer Assessment

It is known that carrying out teaching process based on smaller groups rather than the
overall classroom facilitates achievement of lesson objectives based on the nature of
lesson and subject. Active learning and personalized teaching methods are more
efficiently used when wide classrooms are divided into smaller groups. Group study,
which is organized based on interests, abilities, skills and perspectives of students as
well as nature of activities, helps students with more efficiently engaging in learning
and teachers with monitoring students more easily. By virtue of group studies, students
learn to act in collaboration with each other and they are encouraged to solve problems
and assume responsibilities together (Doganay and Karip, 2006). To this end, in-group
peer and self-assessment form was developed in order to obtain opinions and thoughts
of students on the subject or subjects delivered during the course of implementation
process in the research.
In scope of the objectives of the lesson, the form to be used for peer and self-
assessment conducted to ensure individual development of cognitive process skills and
student participation within group are continuously followed, was adapted from high
school physics course book (Kurnaz et. al, 2010). The validity of scope was ensured by

receiving opinions from three specialized academicians and two physics teachers to this
end. The form which consists of 24 items was prepared in 4-point Likert scale where
always, usually, sometimes and never corresponded to (4), (3), (2) and (1), respectively.
Students were explained how to fill in the form, which was filled out for seven times by
different students within a group after application of each worksheet.
2.3. Data Analysis

2.3.1. Analysis of individual interviews
Interviews were recorded and transcribed into writing. Responses to questions in these
transcriptions were classified based on similar or different meanings, and also
exemplary quotations were directly reported without changing the meaning. It was
primarily attempted to identify the mutual points of agreement or disagreement of
individuals in the analysis of the interview data. Rather than predefining the categories,
these were developed as a result of grouping these in accordance with the similarities or
contrasts of student responses (Ozsevgeç, 2007).
It is recommended that, rather than verbatim quotation of all of the statements
made by individuals during the interviews, researchers should omit their expressions
and comments, and the information obtained should be adjusted subsequent to this
stage in the analysis of interviews (Cohen & Manion, 1989). Cohen and Manion (1989)
suggest that correlated expressions should be grouped into the same categories.
Furthermore, it is believed that direct quotation of sentences as a verbatim reflection of
thoughts of individuals would prove highly useful in the presentation of interviews.
2.3.2. Analysis of observations

As researcher is continuously involved in the process, a nested analysis of the data
obtained from the observation forms both directly through the process and at the end of
the process by examining camera records was conducted through two distinct
approaches: qualitative and quantitative.
The process of teaching the unit based on seven worksheets was observed by
researchers, and qualitative data were obtained by calculating the mean observation
score for each item on the form. Scoring was based on factors such as number of
repetition of a behavior based on its quality and contents, degree of participation, level
of attention and actions that should be taken one time at minimum. Items with a mean
score of 2 and higher were considered to be realized at the desired level (Ozsevgec,
2007). The notes written down by researchers during observations constituted the
qualitative aspect of findings.

2.3.3. Analysis of peer assessment

For in-group peer assessments, total scores of items for 23 behaviors addressed on the
form were calculated for 52 students. Each student assigned points ranging between 0
to 3 to each item. As there are a total of 52 students, maximum and minimum score of a
given item may range between 156 and 0, respectively. As there are 7 worksheets
included in the study, maximum score to each item will be 10902.
3. Findings
3.1. Findings obtained from interviews

Responses of students to main questions were analyzed based on their similarities in
the study. Interview transcriptions were analyzed again by researchers with an interval
of 8 months, and these were compared to previous results in order to enhance
reliability. Comments were finalized taking identified new circumstances and data into
consideration.
The prominent statements made by students in the evaluation at the end of
question "What are your opinions on the coherence of page layout, font and figures with the
subject, its colorfulness, language and time in regard to usability of worksheets that were used in
the research process?" are given in Table 1.
Table 1: Student Opinions on Effectiveness of Worksheets

No problem was observed on page layout, font, figure size, color and language. However, there were
S13
minor deviations in the timing of activities.
I think the page layout is good but more time could have been allocated. I think too many questions
S20
were asked. Learning with questions can be good, but this is somehow tedious.
I believe that page layout and font size of the test is suitable for 11th grade students. Images were
used and videos were involved as necessary. Needed questions were included. In my opinion, this
S24 worksheet has been prepared very well in respect to delivering information through research and
experiments rather than directly, so that 11th grade students can make researches. If text has been
included to a lesser degree, students would have been less bored.
It was all very nice. I want to say something about the images: While we were conducting
S32 experiments, similar images were already included on the page. This was very nice. We both saw
them on the page and in real life, which made them remembered even more easily.
At first, I was somehow surprised when I saw the pages. Because they had different designs than our
S35 usual books. Their colorfulness was better for us. Because colorless things are not perceived well by
students.
Worksheets are very intriguing. In some aspect, they attract student to the lesson more than the
S45 usual. Also, knowledge becomes permanent as students learn by doing and experiencing it. We learn
more in short time. As for the page layout, it is enriched with images and visuals. It is nice.

As it is seen in Table 2, students expressed that worksheets are considerably

sufficient and useful. In this regard, various studies report that having students conduct
experiments with concrete materials at various stages of activities that are prepared in
accordance with constructivist approach to ensure their involvement facilitates
understanding subjects with abstract contents, allows them to construct the information
by themselves, and enables students to experience further in-depth learning by
practicing their information and experience in new situations (Acıslı, 2010; Bayrakceken
et al. 2009; Demirci & Cirkinoglu, 2004; Gurbuz, 2012; Hırca, 2008).
However, students criticized that "time was not sufficient and too many questions
were included, therefore it was boring to respond them in writing" for the activities. It is
believed that these criticisms arise from the need for guidance with questions for steps
based on questioning and exploring that are intrinsically included in the constructivist
approach. Also, as a result of reviewing student statements and worksheets, it was
concluded that the reason for students to fail in filling out the worksheets as required
and to experience time-related issues arose from the fact that they had never received a
lesson in constructivist approach during their overall academic life and they were
reluctant to write.
In this regard; S13 and S24 made the following statements:
S13: ‚Had students been experienced, it was obvious that no problem would have been
encountered since they would have already been predisposed to it‛.
S24: ‚As we are a student group that is used to ready-made information, we had a really
difficult time during this study period of two months. Actually, these activities were not
challenging. But we encountered something to which we are not used. In fact, expected durations
are appropriate. However, this took somehow longer than the expected. I mean, these activities
were normally doable within the anticipated time."
The considerations about the time allocated to activities in this respect
corroborate the suggestions of Ayas (1995).
The prominent statements in the responses to the question "What do you think
about implementation of this method in physics lesson?" are given in Table 2.
Table 2: Student Opinions on Employment of 7E Model in Physics Lesson

It could be more suitable to have students comprehend certain concepts in Physics lesson with
S13
experiments.
Physics contents are predominantly things that should be explored with experiments; therefore I
S20
think that it is a suitable method for physics.
Physics lesson is comprised neither mathematical contents nor verbal statements in full. This method
S24
should be practiced for development of our conceptual skills. It enables us to remember them.
S32 Physics is the nightmare of several students. We can say that this is a good method to make physics

enjoyable and pleasing.

In my opinion, this was very good. Because the lessons were pleasing. It was also good since we were
S35
learning things about life. Physics can be remembered much more easily if it is instructed like this.
As it is seen in Table 2, students expressed that the employment of this method

in physics lesson is suitable as the lesson process ‚is oriented at exploration, is easily
remembered, makes visuals and learning by doing and experiencing things prominent and is
pleasing". In this regard, several results in the literature indicate positive contributions
of employment of constructivist approach-based methods in academic success and
attitude in physics lessons (Ergin, 2006; Gurbuz, Turgut & Salar, 2013; Hırca, 2008;
Kanli, 2007; Keser, 2003).
The prominent expressions of students in the evaluation of the question "In your
opinion, what are the positive and negative aspects of learning physics lesson based on 7E
model?" either in direct manner or in the following questions are given in Table 3.
Table 3: Student Opinions on Positive and Negative Aspects of 7E Model

It supported us as it was rather based on daily practices. We experienced and learned by ourselves.
S13
However, certain disconnections were experienced as we were not really dependent on the teacher.
While learning the lesson through activities with friends in the group enabled permanent
S20
memorization of information, the fact that it lasted long affected as negatively.
I am of the opinion that it was a nice activity. We learned several concepts, studied with our friends
in groups, developed our communication skills and we became able to think scientifically throughout
a long process of studying. When the process is extended too long, students tend to get bored. This
S24
can lead to a reluctance to the subject. I almost never studied at the initial stage of the process. I only
studied when examinations were close. However, our acquirements are what matters. I am of the
opinion that it was a nice activity and I acquired a lot.
It was permanent since we made experiments Ferromagnetic materials, diamagnetic materials...
S32 These were really memorized well. However, continuously being at a laboratory setting and writing
tend to get students bored. This should also be considered.
We have to have a certain degree of knowledge at a lesson taught with 7E model. Our teacher
initially explained everything to the fundamentals; however, when we compare someone who does
not know anything to someone who knows to a certain extent, this model would allow someone with
S35
knowledge learn better. The negative aspect was particularly the loss of time. Students were
sometimes disconnected from the lesson. These aside, it is a positive structure and a positive model in
general.
I think there were not too many negative aspects. Positive aspects include more permanent
memorization in a shorter period of time. I acquired the knowledge as I learned by doing and
S45
experiencing it. More permanent and better results could be achieved if this method is implemented
full-time.

As it is seen in Table 3, students expressed that the employment of this method is

suitable as the lesson process ‚includes practices from daily life, is easily remembered, makes
learning by doing and experiencing things prominent and includes activities in the lesson". In
this regard, several results in the literature indicate positive contributions of
employment of constructivist approach-based methods in academic success and
attitude (Bozdogan & Altuncekic, 2007; Hırca, 2008; Kanli, 2007; Keser, 2003; Ozmen,
2004; Tas & Secken, 2009).
However, students expressed their opinions on the negative aspects of the model
by stating that "it is tiresome to suddenly quit the habit of previous teacher-dependent learning
process and become more active, time is not enough and there are too many questions included,
therefore it is boring to respond to them in writing, and being at a laboratory instead of the
classroom setting they are accustomed to is tedious." In regard to these criticisms, it is stated
in the literature for the roles of teachers and students in lessons with constructivist
approach that lessons should be delivered in settings with suitable tools and equipment
due to the fact that the attitudes and behaviors of students are intrinsically exploratory
and more active than the teacher (Acıslı, 2010; Bayrakceken et al. 2009; Hırca, 2008;
Kanli, 2007). Therefore, these criticisms could probably arise from past habits of
learning, and individual differences could influence this issue as well.
3.2. Findings Obtained from Observations

This section includes the findings obtained from events, phenomenon and behaviors
observed at each stage of 7E model. Scores were assigned with an evaluation of
frequency of actions, degree of participation and activities that should be carried out
once at minimum in the behaviors according to the nature of targeted acquirements.
After researchers asked predetermined student groups to sit on tabled arranged
in U-formation at the physics laboratory of the school, they informed the students on
how the lesson was going to be delivered based on the distributed worksheets, and the
respective responsibilities of the teacher and the students during this process.
Furthermore, an emphasis was made on collective actions of students in group study to
warn students about not remaining passive in performance, being attentive to potential
electric shocks and usage of tools and equipment. The practice was initiated after the
teacher responded the questions of students on the process.
The overall results of observation on the evaluation of behaviors expected from
the teacher and the students are given in Appendix 2 for all stages of 7E model.
At the initial stage, 1.50, 1.93 and 1.73 mean scores were assigned to participation
of students in discussions with their available knowledge, asking questions for
comprehension of the subject and good use of time, respectively (Appendix 2). The

result appears to emerge from insufficient self-confidence of students, the concern of

being ashamed before the class and being inexperienced in laboratory activities.
During the process of engaging the students, teacher introduced the subject with
the demonstration experiment on pages 2, 4, 5 and 7 and video display on pages 1, 3
and 6 in accordance with constructivist approach, and then asked the students to
answer the questions about video or demonstration experiment on the worksheets as
necessary. Students initially asked questions on what they were supposed to do on a
frequent basis in this step, however they grew accustomed over time. Teacher offered
guidance and gave warnings to enable in-group studies. It was observed that students
responded the questions by discussing with each other. As the process advanced, the
students and the teacher were observed to have accommodated themselves, being
comfortable.
In the exploration stage, students played active roles in the process and
attempted to carry out their activities with the tools and equipment given to them in the
suitable learning environment. However, it was observed that the teacher mostly
rejected the students and asked new questions in an attempt to make students more
active since the students were initially trying to achieve results at once by asking
questions on the result of the activity to the teacher. Furthermore, students took notes
when the teacher insisted them on recording the results of the study. It drew the
attention that students were not strong in collaborative action, therefore teacher warned
that everyone should play a role and contribute to the process through allocation of
tasks. It was also noticed that the teacher guided the students with questions to involve
them in engage stage, so that exploratory activities could be meaningful to students. It
was seen that the implementation of this step took longer than anticipated with a mean
score of 1.50. It was observed that this delay was due to the fact that the students were
both slow and had to repeat the activities for a few times since their scientific process
skills were underdeveloped.
In the explain step, the mean scores evaluated for the expected behaviors of
students were ‚1.29 for being willing to participate in the process; 1.93 for explaining what
they have understood to other students and the teacher in line with what they explored; 1.29 for
questioning the explanations of other students; 1.14 for being able to interpret the meaning of
concepts, figures and graphics; and 1.43 for asking questions relevant to problem solving and
future activities‛ (Appendix 2). We are of the opinion that the students were
unaccustomed to construct the knowledge by themselves, lacked adequate self-
improvement in analyzing the knowledge in theoretical and graphic aspects in
mathematical terms in order to assimilate the physics-related information, had not
acquired an adequate level of scientific process skills through the conventional method

and fell short in expressing the information in a scientific language in the overall
process. However, observations of video reveal that students achieved progress over
time. In accordance with this given situation, it is reported the social improvement and
communication skills, advanced thinking skills and self-confidence of students are
enhanced by means of activities prepared based on constructivist approach
(Bayrakçeken et al., 2009; Bozdogan & Altuncekic, 2007; Keser, 2003).
In the elaborate step, the mean scores of observed student behaviors were "1.76
for using only the information delivered by the teacher in discussions and 3.00 for certain
students being more active in the study as compared to others". Even though there was
progress in the behavior of using only the information delivered by the teacher in
discussions throughout the process, the mean score fell below 2. The reason for this is
the fact that students remain dependent on memorization in the previous teacher-
centered teaching process (Bayrakceken et al., 2009; Gurbuz, 2012, Keser, 2003;
Ozsevgec, 2007).
In the elaborate step, the behavior of asking questions such as "What have you
previously learned/known?", "What do you think about .....?", "What can you do with your
available knowledge that you have acquired so far?" in order to activate the students for
questioning and exploring in line with the constructivist approach was evaluated with a
mean score of 1.57 while the mean score of the behavior of taking the individual
differences in students into consideration was 1.36. These behaviors fell below the
expected level.
In the extend step, which is an important stage of the constructivist
infrastructure of 7E model, the behaviors expected from students were evaluated with
the mean scores of "1.64 for discussing the examples provided to them with group friends at
first and then with the classroom and trying to find solutions; 1.00 for giving examples from the
daily life in order to reinforce the topic; 1.71 for associating the existing concepts with other
areas and/or other concepts/subjects; and 1.43 for applying new names, definitions, explanations
and skill in new yet similar situations" (Appendix 2). Therefore, it can be suggested that
the students had difficulty in constructing the acquirements and introducing a scientific
identity to them. Considering the students with weighted mean scores above 2.00 in
other behaviors expected from students, it is observed that students asked inquiry
questions which guided them to advanced acquirements and demonstrated the
improvement of constructivist approach. Furthermore, from time to time, the teacher
assigned additional homework and directly delivered information by extending beyond
the role of guiding in an attempt to prevent loss of time due to the inexperience of
students in the area of subjects that should have been acquired by students in daily life

in response to exploratory and interpretative questions addressed by students in

relation to advanced thinking skills.
In the step of exchanging ideas as a reflection of advanced cognitive
improvement following the extend step, weighted mean scores of certain behaviors
remained below 2.00 when the behaviors expected from students were observed
(Appendix 2). These were evaluated with the weighted mean scores of "1.50 for giving
examples from daily life to reinforce the subject; 1.71 for collaborating with group friends in
research; 1.86 for being willing to participate in class activities and discussions based on
acquired knowledge". As the behavior "giving examples from daily life to reinforce the subject"
is an action in the meta-cognitive knowledge level of evaluation aspect according to
Bloom Taxonomy in scope of the subject area upon construction of scientific
information, each and every student cannot be possibly expected to achieve such level
of progress. However, it was observed that the behaviors at this level originated from
particular interest of a few students in both classrooms. For instance, students were
observed to exhibit evaluation level behaviors in sharing past experiences in scope of
the subjects of electrical circuits, devices operating with electric motor and power
generating dynamos". It appears that, in respect to the behavior of "collaborating with
group friends in research", students could act independently due to an internal
segregation of students who were keenly interested in the subject from those who had
lower levels of interest due to their individual characteristics.
In the evaluate step, students fell below 2.00 with the weighted mean scores of
"1.79 for realizing that their performance will be evaluated during the activities and 1.50 for
realizing their own deficiencies with the questions asked, and engaging in theoretical research
again" for these student behaviors (Appendix 2).
3.3. Findings Obtained from Peer Assessment

For in-group peer assessments, distribution of total scores of items of 23 behaviors
within the process for 52 students in scope of 7 worksheets is given in Table 4 below.
Table 4: Distribution of Scores of Items for Peer Assessment Based on Worksheets

In-Group Peer Assessment Behaviors Total Behavior Scores Of The Entire Total
Sample Based On Worksheets Score of
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th Item
WS WS WS WS WS WS WS
1. Being attentive to subject 151 147 150 144 130 139 140 1001
2. Decision-making with the group 147 146 150 137 140 137 145 1002
3. Respecting the distribution of tasks in the 151 152 150 132 134 141 141 1001
group

4. Fulfilling their own task successfully in 147 140 137 105 123 133 146 931
given time
5. Giving timely and effective feedbacks to 139 130 129 120 121 123 125 887
group friends
6. Supporting learning process of group 155 147 146 139 133 137 137 994
7. Avoiding behaviors that push other 151 152 154 150 142 151 146 1046
group friends to background
8. Volunteering for tasks and offering 132 128 124 127 124 118 116 869
constructive recommendations for other
activities
9. Sharing the preliminary knowledge on 106 116 125 200 104 127 110 788
the subject with friends and teacher in the
classroom
10. Completing relevant sections of 150 152 148 141 135 147 126 999
worksheet meticulously
11. Trying to recognize and use the tools, 150 154 154 147 137 154 153 1049
equipment and devised used in classroom
activities (observation, experiment,
demonstration etc.)
12. Listening to and trying to understand 148 148 156 245 143 148 151 1039
explanations of the teacher
13. Referring back to previous activities in 137 142 128 119 119 128 122 895
explanations, using recorded
observations and trying to reach logical
inferences by using observation findings
14. Recording, interpreting and analyzing 124 116 116 107 112 114 87 776
observations, findings, ideas and
explanations Preparing reports with
charts and graphics as necessary
15. Trying predictions and hypothesis with 87 98 113 116 108 97 54 673
alternative methods and discussing these
with other students
16. Freely thinking about and trying to find 140 143 134 130 118 137 107 909
solutions to questions or problems
17. Participating in discussions by using 136 138 127 138 121 129 111 900
observation results and making positive
contributions with new opinions and
ideas
18. Trying to give meaning to encountered 144 139 135 120 138 139 147 962
new concepts
19. Trying to acquire new skills 130 133 141 129 133 150 149 965
20. Applying new names, definitions, 133 121 116 128 128 135 116 877
explanations and skill in new yet similar
situations

21. Listening to and questioning the 107 93 114 125 121 140 113 813
explanations of other students from a
critical perspective
22. Answering the questions on the 154 152 147 146 141 154 140 1034
worksheet at the end of the activity
23. Asks questions or makes inferences on 34 36 72 66 66 67 28 369
advanced stages based on acquirements
(knowledge, skills, etc.)
During the practice, the 9th behavior of ‚sharing the preliminary knowledge on the
subject with friends and teacher in the classroom‛ had a total score of 788; 14th behavior of
‚recording, interpreting and analyzing observations, findings, ideas and explanations,
Preparing reports with charts and graphics as necessary‛ had a total score of 788; 15th
behavior of ‚trying predictions and hypothesis with alternative methods and discussing
these with other students‛ had a total score of 673 and 23rd behavior of ‚asking questions
or making inferences on advanced stages based on acquirements (knowledge, skills, etc.‛ had a
total score of 369 when the in-group peer assessment of student behaviors in group
were considered in accordance with the nature of constructivist approach and scientific
process skills.
4. Results and Suggestions
Upon examination of findings obtained from the practices in both classrooms, it was
determined that the subject was highly extensive, active learning and scientific process
skills of students were not adequately developed and the motivation of certain students
decreased for activities. This corroborates the suggestions of Ayas (1995), Keser (2003)
and Saka (2006) on the time allocated in addition to the selection of subjects and
concepts to be researched in constructivist learning environment.
Discussions were carried out through the employment of question-answer
method. When students were not permitted to use any resources, it was determined
that students were initially surprised and they had great difficulty in attempting to
define the relevant concepts in accordance with the book. However, students were
encouraged to express their knowledge with their own sentences. It was realized in this
process that several students lacked the confidence in their knowledge on basic
concepts for magnetism, which they had learned in the previous lesson, and they were
shy about it.
In the engage step, which is the first step of the worksheets, questions,
demonstrations or short videos that could create a discussion about the target concept

were specifically used. Thus, it was attempted to establish a direct connection on the
conceptual level with the targeted acquirement with the help of questions and
discussions prepared to guide students into realizing their available knowledge and
deficiencies. As for the steps of engage and explore, findings obtained from
observations, peer assessments, completion of worksheets and discussions indicate that
students in both classrooms went through an efficient engage step and succeeded in
problems and study targets in accordance with the researches to be carried out in the
explore step. Upon reviewing from the aspect of exploration process, it is observed that
students in both of the classrooms went through the research subjects and their tasks for
these researches efficiently based on the worksheets in scope of a suitable plan in
accordance with the activities carried out at the engage step. It is understood from the
observations and interview findings that carrying out a different activity and the
entertaining aspects arising from peer relationships led to efficient engage and explore
steps for students.
It was determined that scientific language was not used sufficiently and students
found writing as tedious in the activities of explain and expand steps. This is also
revealed with the statements of students in the interviews. In order for conceptual
change to occur, students should be provided with a learning environment in which
they notice the views of themselves and the others, they discuss the coherent and
incoherent aspects of these views, support their suggestions with scientific evidence,
explain any possible changes in their opinions and evaluate themselves as well as
others (Saka, 2006; Yildiz, 2008).
In the steps of elaborate and exchange, students were enabled to be more willing
and active as the questions, videos and discussions in these steps were oriented at the
daily life beyond the conceptual level, and operating principles of certain devices with a
more vital and engaging nature as well as relating to the subject of magnetism. Students
who had opinions were enabled to take the floor and discuss by encouraging students
to make associations between the acquirements of the subjects in the activities carried
out in this context.
It was determined that the students received support from group members in
developing tables, drawing graphics, solving problems, calculating the results and
writing the reports. However, it was determined that the expected qualities had not
sufficiently developed in respect to creating data records and tables, drawing graphics
or explaining what had been done in the efficient expression of causality relation with
an effective interpretation of results. The interview findings reveal that the inexperience
of students in laboratory played a great role in this reason.

It is revealed from the observations during the research process and findings
from the student interviews that the majority of students perceived the lessons as more
pleasing by virtue of the discussions in physics lesson and they learned the information
permanently by virtue of the practices. Students expressed that they had done a high
number of things by thinking by themselves, they established the mechanisms and
researched and found the facts by themselves. Students mentioned that the information
learned through their own experience and thinking was more permanent and they had
the opportunity to examine the occurrences with their reasons. Furthermore, they
expressed that they were more comfortable in writing their ideas and their interest in
the subject was further enhances as the questions on the worksheets were linked to
daily life. These findings are in parallel to the results of researches yielded by Acıslı
(2010), Bayrakceken et al. (2009), Costu, Karatas and Ayas (2003), Gurbuz (2012), Hırca
(2008), Hırca, Calık & Seven (2011), Kanli (2007), Kilavuz (2005), Ozsevgec (2007) and
Yildiz (2008). Furthermore, various studies report that having students conduct
experiments with concrete materials at various stages of activities that are prepared in
accordance with constructivist approach to ensure their involvement facilitates
understanding subjects with abstract contents, allows them to construct the information
by themselves, and enables students to experience further in-depth learning by
practicing their information and experience in new situations (Altun, Acıslı & Turgut,
2010; Bayrakçeken et al., 2009; Demirci & Çirkinoğlu, 2004; Hırça, Çalık & Seven , 2011;
Yildiz, 2008).
Even though the lesson plan was followed, circumstances where the teacher
acted with a conventional understanding based on past were also observed. This was
particularly noticeable in the explain step, in which the teacher is more active. Teacher
assuming a role that presents information and explains the points that were not
understood in the classroom is not adequate for a new concept to be assimilated. It is
critically important to reveal the concept-related opinions of both teachers and students
in classrooms where teaching activities that support conceptual change are carried out.
In parallel to this, it is emphasized in the literature that a new concept should be
learned through a developmental manner rather than sudden changes expected to be
observed in students (Yildiz, 2008). Teaching methods which are carried out with
questions and answers and in which scientific principles are explained with
formulations or examples would fall short in this sense. Situations that will lead to
scientific conflict should be delivered to students in order for them to realize the
opinions of themselves and other friends in the classroom. Great importance should be
attached to enabling students to clearly see the conflict with their own knowledge and
new information, ensuring that the evidence presented for the resolution of the conflict

would actually convince the students and the having students sense the significance of
conflict (Yildiz, 2008). In parallel to this, Kang, Scharmann and Gve Noh (2004)
recommend that situations which would engage students should be used. A student
who experiences the conflict should understand that the available concepts fall short in
offering a solution and should opt for changing these concepts. Vosniadou (1994)
perceives conceptual change as the continuance of the gradual change of mental model
of the individual about the surrounding world. The said change is realized when
concept is enriched and previous concepts are renewed. Enrichment can occur when
new information is included in the existing conceptual structure whereas renewal arises
from the change in the mental structure or belief. In addition to learning environment,
individual characteristics of students also influence the conceptual change. It is believed
that meta-cognition, belief of self-sufficiency and factors such as interest, attention and
benefit value influence conceptual change (Yildiz, 2008). Misconceptions or alternative
opinions of even one student on the subject addressed in the group studies are of
importance as these may influence other group members as well. In order to prevent
this, the teacher and all students in the classroom should record the final result inferred
from discussions to the relevant section on the worksheet.
Upon reviewing Table 4, it is observed that the 9th behavior of "sharing the
preliminary knowledge on the subject with friends and teacher in the classroom" for in-group
peer assessment has a lower total score than others with 788. It is believed that this
situation arises from the fact that students lack self-confidence with the thought that
their preliminary knowledge is insufficient or they are sky of potential results of an
inaccurate statement. 14th behavior of "recording, interpreting and analyzing observations,
findings, ideas and explanations" has a total score of 776, which is lower than the other
behavior scores. It is believed that this situation arises from the reluctance of students to
writing an inadequate skills of drawing mathematical graphics and analyzing these
based on the observations of researchers and statements in student interviews. 15th
behavior of ‚trying predictions and hypothesis with alternative methods and discussing these
with other students‛ had a total score of 673 and 23rd behavior of ‚asking questions or
making inferences on advanced stages based on acquirements (knowledge, skills, etc.‛ had a
total score of 369 when the in-group peer assessment of student behaviors in group
were considered in accordance with the nature of constructivist approach and scientific
process skills. It is believed that the reason for the low scores of these behaviors arise
from the fact that these behaviors require advanced level skills on development.
There are a high number of qualitative and quantitative findings in the literature
which indicate that the scientific process skills of students are improved in classroom
settings where activities prepared in accordance with constructivist approach are used.

n the other hand, it is reported the social improvement, communication and manual
skills,, advanced thinking skills and self-confidence of students are enhanced by means
of activities prepared based on constructivist approach (Akerson et al. 2009;
Bayrakceken et al., 2009; Boddy, Watson & Aubusson, 2003; Bozdogan & Altuncekic,
2007).
References
1. Acıslı, S. (2010). The examination of the influence of the materials generated in

compliance with 5e learning model on physics laboratory application (Unpublished
doctoral thesis), Ataturk University, Turkey.
2. Akerson, V. L., Townsend, S., Donnelly, L. A., Hanson D. L., Tira, P., & White, O.
(2009). Scientific Modelling for Inquiring Teachers Network (SMIT’N): The
Influence on Elementary Teachers’ Views of Nature of Science, Inquiry, and
Modelling, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 21-40 DOI 10.1007/s10972-008-
9116-5.
3. Altun, S., Açışlı, S. & Turgut, U., (2010). The effect of five e instructional model
on pre-service science teachers’ attitudes towards physics laboratory and
development of scientific process skills. Kastamonu Education Journal, 18 (1), 147-
158.
4. Avcioglu, O. (2008). Investigation of the effects of 7E model on success, in the subject of
Newton laws of second grade high school students? physics classes (Unpublished
doctoral thesis). Gazi University, Turkey.
5. Ayas, A. (1995). A study on program development and implementation
techniques in science: evaluation of two contemporary approaches, Hacettepe
University the Journal of Education 11, 149-155.
6. Bayrakceken, S., Canpolat, N., Karaman, S., Celik, S., Aggul, F., & Avinc, I.
(2009). Secondary and tertiary levels in the preparation of appropriate active learning
activities constructivist approach to teaching chemistry, implementation and evaluation.
TUBITAK Project No: 107K095
7. Boddy, N., Watson, K., & Aubusson, P. (2003). A Trial of the five es: a referent
model for constructivist teaching and learning. Research in Science Education 33,
27-42.
8. Bozdogan, E. & Altuncekic A. (2007). Science teacher candidates' views on the
availability of 5E teaching model. Kastamonu Education Journal, 15(2), 579-590.

9. Budak, I. (2000). Developing and evaluating a computer-assisted mathematics teaching

material for numbers (Unpublished master thesis), Karadeniz Technical University,
Turkey.
10. Carkıt, C., (2013). Assessment of grammar teaching process in secondary schools for
constructivist approach (Unpublished Master Thesis), Erciyes University, Turkey.
11. Cepni S., Ayas A., Johnson D. & Turgut M. F. (1997). Teaching Physics. World
Bank National Education Development Project Pre-Service Teacher Training.
Ankara.
12. Cepni, S., San, H. M., Gokdere, M. & Kucuk, M. (2001). Examples of activities to the
appropriate development model in structuring theory 7E minds in science teaching. New
Millennium at the beginning of the Year of Science and Education Symposium
Proceedings, Maltepe University, İstanbul, (s. 83-190).
13. Cohen, L., & Manion, L., 1989. Research Methods in Education. Third edition.
Routledge Publications, New York.
14. Coştu, B., Karatas, F. O. & Ayas, A. (2003). Using the worksheets in the teaching
of concepts. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 14 (2), 33-48.
15. Demirci, N. & Çirkinoğlu, A. (2004). Determining Students'
Preconceptions/Misconceptions in Electricity and Magnetism Concepts. Journal of
Turkish Science Education 2, 116-138
16. Doganay, A. & Karip, E. (2006). Planning and evaluation in education. Ankara:
Pegem Publishing.
17. Eisenkraft, A. (2003). Expanding the 5E model. Science Teacher, 70(6), 56-59.
18. Ergin, İ., (2006). An example for the effect of 5e model on the academic success, attitude
and recognition level of students’ in physics education: ‚Projectile motion in two
dimensions‛ (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Gazi University, Turkey.
19. Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York:
Teachers College Press.
20. Gurbuz, F. (2012). The effect 7e model on academic achievement and retention of
knowledge in the unit of ‚Electricity in our Life‛ in 6th grade science and technology
(Unpublished doctoral thesis), Ataturk University, Turkey.
21. Gurbuz, F., Turgut, U., & Salar, R. (2013). The Effect of 7E Learning Model on
Academic Achievements and Retention of 6th Grade Science and Technology
Course Students in the Unit" Electricity in Our Life". Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 10(3).
22. Hırca, N. (2008). An investigation of effects on conceptual change of developed materials
based on 5E model in unit ‚work, power and energy‛ (Unpublished doctoral thesis),
Ataturk University, Turkey.

23. Hırca, N., Calık, M., & Seven S., (2011), Effects of Guide Materials Based on 5E
Model on Students’ Conceptual Change and Their Attitudes towards Physics: A
Case for ‘Work, Power and Energy’ Unit. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8
(1), 139-152.
24. Kang, S., Scharmann, L. Gve Noh, T. (2004). Reexamining the role of cognitive
conflict in science concept learning. Research in science education, 34 (1),71–96.
25. Kanli, U. (2007). The effects of a laboratory based on the 7e model with verification
laboratory approach on students? Development of science process skills and conceptual
achievement (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Gazi University, Turkey.
26. Keser, O. F. (2003). Designing and implementing a constructivist learning
environment for physics education (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Karadeniz
Technical University, Turkey.
27. Kilavuz, Y. (2005). The effects of 5E learning cycle model based on constructivist theory
on tenth grade students' understanding of acid-base concepts (Unpublished master
thesis), Middle East Technical University, Turkey.
28. Kurnaz, A., Değermenci, A., Kalyoncu, C., Pektaş, E., Bayraktar, G., Aydın, U. &
Moradaoğlu, Y. (2010). 11. Grade School Textbook. Ankara: Ozkan Publishing.
29. Kurt, S. (2002). Worksheets development according to constructivist view of learning in
physics teaching (Unpublished master thesis), Karadeniz Technical University,
Turkey.
30. Kuzu, A. (2009). Action research in teacher training and professional
development. The Journal of International Social Research 2(6), 425-433.
31. McMillan, J.H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based
inquiry (Seventh Edition). Boston: Pearson Education.
32. McNiff, J., Lomax, P. and Whitehead, J. (2004). You and your action research project.
London and New York: Routlegde.
33. Mills, G. E. (2003). Action research ‘A guide for the teacher researcher’. (Second
Edition). New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.
34. Ozmen, H., (2004). Constructivist learning theory and technology-supported
learning in science education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology
3(1) 1303-6521.
35. Ozsevgec, T. (2006). Determining Effectiveness of Student Guiding Material
Based On the 5E Model in ‚Force and Motion‛ Unit. Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 3(2), 36-48.
36. Ozsevgec, T. (2007). Determining effectiveness of guided materials about force and
motion unit based on the 5E model for elementary students (Unpublished doctoral
thesis), Karadeniz Technical University, Turkey.

37. Raizen, S. A., & Rossi, P. H. (1981). Program Evaluation in Education: When? How?
To What Ends?. National Academy Press: NW Washington.
38. Sahin, H., (2014). The reflections of the constructivist approach to science
teaching. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 29, 151- 170.
39. Saka, A. (2006). The effect of 5E model on removing science student teachers'
misconceptions about genetics (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Karadeniz Technical
University, Turkey.
40. Savas, B. (2009). Constructivist learning. A. Kaya (Ed). Educational Psychology
(s.411-434). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
41. Tas G. ve Secken N., (2009).The effect of constructivist approach to the teaching
of the unit ‚journey to the inner structure of matter‛. e-Journal of New World
Sciences Academy 4(2), 520-533.
42. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual changes.
Learning and ınstruction, 4, 45–69.
43. Yasar, M. D., & Sozbilir, M. (2012). Implementation Of The Constructivist
Principles Into Practice By The Teachers In The 9th Grade Chemistry
Curriculum. International Journal of Social Science, 5,7, p. 789-807.
44. Yerdelen, S., (2013). The effect of the instruction based on the epistemologically and
metacognitively improved 7E learning cycle on tenth grade students' achievement and
epistemological understandings in physics (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Middle
East Technical University, Turkey.
45. Yildiz, E. (2008). The effects of metacognition during the instruction based on
conceptual change used with 5E model: An application regarding the force and motion
subject in the 7th grade. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Dokuz Eylül University,
Turkey.

Appendix 1
1. About the usability of worksheets, what are your opinions on the following:
 Page layout;
 Font;
 Size of figures;
 Color;
 Language;
 Time.
Would you like to recommend anything on any aspects that are deficient or
should be corrected?
2. What are your opinions on whether the worksheets serve for their intended
purpose (duration, integrity of subject)?
3. What do you think about learning the lessons through this method?
4. What do you think about application of this method in physics lesson?
5. Has this method proven useful to you in respect to associating the learned
concepts with daily life?
6. Which subject did you understand better by virtue of this method? Can you
explain?
7. Did you feel yourself inadequate in any circumstance during the lesson
activities? Please explain if you did.
8. What do you think about exploring thinks with your group friends?
9. Can you list any activities that you remember to have done so far?
10. If you were to re-experience this process, which issues would you pay attention
to and what kind of corrections and additions would you make?
11. What are your expectations from the teacher during this process?
12. What are negative and positive aspects of the practice for you?

Appendix 2
7E OBSERVED BEHAVIORS Mean
LEARNING Score
STAGE
They are watching the introduction activity aimed to engage (demonstration or video). 3.00
Students are focused on the introduction activity or the addressed problem. 2.64
STUDENTS
Students were willing to participate in the discussion with their available knowledge. 1.50
They asked questions on the subject in order to understand it. 1.93
They discussed the answers to the question in the introduction section with their friends. 2.36
1. STAGE: ENGAGE
They completed relevant sections of worksheet. 2.93

They used the time effectively and efficiently. 1.79
Teacher started the activities with subjects and problems relevant to real life. 3.00
Teacher attempted to reveal available knowledge of students about the new concept or subject. 2.71
Teacher informed on how the lesson was to be carried out. 2.21
TEACHER
Teacher drew attention of students to the new subject by supporting their previous knowledge and engaged them. 3.00
Teacher asked questions to students while starting the activities. 2.50
Teacher explained the concepts in scope of the subject. 1.71
Teacher followed the process in accordance with the worksheet. 1.86
Teacher encouraged students to explore by themselves rather than directly obtaining information from teacher. 2.64
They read the worksheet and tried to prepare and apply the activity in accordance with the instructions. 2.64
They tried to use the tools and instruments in practices. 2.71
They allowed each other to speak within the group. 2.57
They collaborated with each other. 2.57
Students interactively spoke with each other and made observations. 2.93
STUDENTS
They took notes, analyzed data and discussed findings about the activity. 2.79
2. STAGE: EXPLORE
They completed relevant sections of worksheet. 3.00

They tried to actively participate in the learning process to the extent possible. 2.21
Certain students were more active as compared to others during the activity. 3.00
Students showed/tended to show their activities during the research to the teacher. 2.14
Students helped with each other and teacher in carrying out the activities. 2.00
They used the time effectively and efficiently. 1.50
Teacher prepared suitable environment for students to conduct shared experiments. 3.00
TEACHER
Teacher encouraged students to study together by offering the least assistance to the extent possible. 2.79
Teacher asked extensive questions to students to enable them to repeat their research as necessary. 2.64
Teacher helped with and guided the students whenever there was a problem in their studies. 3.00
Teacher encouraged students to explore by themselves rather than directly obtaining information from teacher. 2.93
They were willing to participate in the process. 1.29
They explained what they had understood to other students and the teacher. 1.93
They used the observational data they had recorded in their explanations. 2.57
They questioned explanations of other students. 1.29
STUDENTS
They made associations with the introduction as a result of the activity. 2.86
They were able to interpret the meaning of concepts, figures and graphics. 1.14
They asked questions about problem solving and future activities. 1.43
3. STAGE: EXPLAIN
Certain students were more active in the solution of encountered problems. 2.71
They listened to and tried to understand explanations of the teacher. 3.00
They noted down the explanations of the teacher on the worksheet. 2.71
Teacher encouraged students to explain and define the concepts. 2.71
Teacher asked students to make explanations in accordance with obtained findings. 2.86
Teacher asked questions to help students with understanding the subject. 2.93
TEACHER
Teacher made explanations by linking participation of students to exploration activities. 3.00

Teacher asked questions on the reasons for statements made by the teacher and their own friends. 2.79
Teacher introduced new concepts by making explanations and definitions considering past experience of students. 2.71
Teacher used preliminary experience of students for explaining new concepts. 3.00
Teacher demonstrated the results of the activity with figures and graphics while using the board. 3.00
Teacher guided the students to restructure their previous knowledge on the subject. 2.64
Students exchanged ideas with each other in order to elaborate their understanding of the subject. 2.07
ELABORATE
STUDENTS
4. STAGE:
They made inferences on similar situations by using the acquirements of past activities. 2.29
They revealed similarities of new definitions, explanations and skills. 2.14
They linked results to concepts. 2.79
They were attentive to have an understanding of the practices. 3.00

They noted the observational data and explanations on relevant sections of worksheet. 2.86
They tried to actively participate in the learning process. 2.14
Certain students were more active as compared to others during the activity. 3.00
They used only the information given by the teacher in discussions. 1.79
Teacher asked questions such as "What have you previously learned/known?", "What do you think about .....?", 1.57
TEACHER
"What can
Teacher you do with
encouraged theyour available
students knowledge
to improve andthat you have
extend their acquired
knowledgeso far?" in order
and skills andtotoenable them with
use them to realize
new 2.71
their acquirements
practices
Teacher and remind
in new situations.
reminded students them of their
of alternative available knowledge.
explanations. 3.00
Teacher considered individual differences in students. 1.36
Teacher toured among the groups and spoke to students to attend to their problems. 3.00
They used previous knowledge to ask questions and generate solutions. 2.43
They discussed the examples given to them with their group friends at first and then with the classroom, made 1.64
explanations
Students gaveand tried torelevant
examples find solutions.
to daily life in order to reinforce the subject. 1.00
STUDENTS
They asked questions which would help with them to make associations with other concepts/subjects and fields. 2.21
They associated the existing concepts with other fields and/or other concepts/subjects. 1.71
5. STAGE: EXTEND
They applied new names, definitions, explanations and skill in new yet similar situations. 1.43
They used their observational findings and noted down the inferences. 2.71
They asked questions about problem solving and future activities. 2.57
Teacher gave opportunities to students for them to assimilate the concepts and improve their skills. 3.00
Teacher asked questions such as "What have you known so far?" and "Why do you think that it is like this?" by 2.93
TEACHER
guiding students
Teacher to refer
tried to make thetoconcepts
existingmore
data and evidence. by presenting new examples and analogies.
comprehensible 2.57
Teacher asked questions and guided the students in order to reveal the similarities/associations of learned concepts 3.00
with the enabled
Teacher other fields
the and/or
studentsother concepts/fields.
to rethink on the accuracy of previously learned concepts. 2.50
Teacher encouraged students to develop more general thoughts on the situations in the activities. 2.86
Teacher used the ideas and suggestions on the situation in the engage step in the extend step. 3.00
Students reinforced the subject with examples from daily life. 1.50
STUDENTS
They collaborated with their group friends in research 1.71

They noticed the importance of having their contributions in the activities taken into consideration. 2.14
6. STAGE: EXCHANGE
They became willing to participate in class activities and discussions based on their acquirements. 1.86
Individuals within the group tried to access the facts by discussing the information obtained from research findings 2.29
with the enabled
Teacher class. interaction among student groups and made students encounter ideas of each other’s. 2.14
Teacher asked questions about problem solving and future activities. 3.00
Teacher supported accurate inferences. 2.71
TEACHER
When students made inaccurate inferences, teacher asked questions to guide students into thinking and accurate 2.71
inferences.
Teacher guided students into using the results of activities. 3.00
Teacher encouraged students to engage in dialogues with themselves and their friends in the classroom. 2.64
Teacher used cognitive expressions such as "classify", "analyze," "predict, and "do" while developing the general 2.36
framework of student
Teacher assigned tasks.homework.
research 1.79
They realized that their performance would be evaluated during the activities. 1.79
They tried to answer the questions by using observational findings in line with the explanations. 3.00
STUDENTS
Students asked questions to have a better understanding of the subject in practices. 2.43
7. STAGE: EVALUATE
They expressed their opinions on the subject. 2.43

They noticed their own deficiencies with the questions asked, and engaged in theoretical research again. 1.50
They asked for the teacher to assist them in application of all activities. 2.36
They completed relevant sections of worksheet and took down notes. 2.29
Teacher asked open end questions such as "Why did you think in this way?, "What is your evidence to this?", 2.29
TEACHER
"What doobserved
Teacher you know about ...?"
whether "How
students would
used newyou explain
concepts and...?".
skills. 3.00
Teacher gave different projects or homework that are associated with real life for performance evaluation. 2.21
Teacher enabled reconstruction of knowledge by responding the questions with student participation. 2.57
Teacher asked students to make in-group assessments. 2.71

Creative Commons licensing terms

Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

7e Lesson Plan in Science

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

7e Lesson Plan in Science

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

European Journal of Education Studies

ISSN: 2501 - 1111

doi: 10.5281/zenodo.571250 Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017

HOW IS THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN PHYSICS LESSON

Keywords: 7E model, physics education, action research

Learning is related to a structural shift in cognition. It is related to automatic

Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.

1.1. Theoretical Framework

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 2

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 3

2.1 Research design and study group

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 4

2.2. Data Collection Tools

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 5

2.2.1 Individual interview

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 6

2.2.3. Peer Assessment

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 7

2.3. Data Analysis

2.3.2. Analysis of observations

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 8

2.3.3. Analysis of peer assessment

3.1. Findings obtained from interviews

Table 1: Student Opinions on Effectiveness of Worksheets

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 9

As it is seen in Table 2, students expressed that worksheets are considerably

Table 2: Student Opinions on Employment of 7E Model in Physics Lesson

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 10

enjoyable and pleasing.

As it is seen in Table 2, students expressed that the employment of this method

Table 3: Student Opinions on Positive and Negative Aspects of 7E Model

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 11

As it is seen in Table 3, students expressed that the employment of this method is

3.2. Findings Obtained from Observations

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 12

result appears to emerge from insufficient self-confidence of students, the concern of

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 13

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 14

in response to exploratory and interpretative questions addressed by students in

3.3. Findings Obtained from Peer Assessment

Table 4: Distribution of Scores of Items for Peer Assessment Based on Worksheets

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 15

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 16

4. Results and Suggestions

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 17

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 18

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 19

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 20

1. Acıslı, S. (2010). The examination of the influence of the materials generated in

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 21

9. Budak, I. (2000). Developing and evaluating a computer-assisted mathematics teaching

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 22

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 23

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 24

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 25

They completed relevant sections of worksheet. 2.93

They completed relevant sections of worksheet. 3.00

Teacher made explanations by linking participation of students to exploration activities. 3.00

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 26

They collaborated with their group friends in research 1.71

They expressed their opinions on the subject. 2.43

European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 6 │ 2017 27

Creative Commons licensing terms